Prager Tagblatt
- For and against — Professor Dr Heinrich Rauchberg
- Roman press campaign against France
- Beneš answers his opponents — Giving up his parliamentary seat
A housing-policy essay weighs landlords’ demands against tenants’ ability to pay. Foreign coverage reports Italian press accusations against France, while Beneš defends his decision to surrender a parliamentary mandate. The page is rich in attributed arguments: compromise, international blame and a politician’s account of party conflict.
Selected paragraphs from the housing essay, the Rome press report and Beneš’s letter. Later housing calculations and the detailed Gajda affair discussion are outside the excerpts.
Translation
For and against — Professor Dr Heinrich Rauchberg
For and against.
By Professor Dr Heinrich Rauchberg.
If this were merely a matter of technical and financial questions that could be considered in a social-policy vacuum, things would be simple. The bill would admittedly need improvements in detail, but it would meet with no serious opposition. The difficulties concern social policy. They lie in how a middle course is drawn between the opposing demands of landlords and tenants. Landlords want to receive at once the full return their houses could yield under free competition, while tenants do not want to pay higher rents—and many of them cannot.
Roman press campaign against France
Roman press campaign against France
“Tolerance is complicity.” — The same protection for the dictator as for the king
Rome, September 13. The newspapers continue their attacks on France, which they accuse of excessive tolerance towards anti-fascist organizations. An article in the semi-official Tribuna is noteworthy for its less vehement language than that of the ultra-fascist papers. It writes:
“The hospitality extended to anti-fascists is increasingly taking on the character of complicity. We must be told what the intention is. The very people responsible for French policy today ought to be the first to understand this.”
Beneš answers his opponents — Giving up his parliamentary seat
Beneš answers his opponents.
A letter to the Legionary Community.
There were two reasons for giving up my parliamentary seat. I understood the difficult position of the party, which had come into conflict with the parliamentary majority and was being reproached because one of its deputies sat in the government. That was not right. As foreign minister, I was regarded by all parties as a minister standing, in a sense, above the parties. Three leading parties—the Czech Social Democrats, the Agrarians and the Socialists—had agreed that I should join the Socialist Party. As I did not wish to make the party’s position more difficult, I gave up my seat. The second reason was the unworthy intrigues within the party.
Context
Who bears the cost of housing?
Rauchberg frames the dispute as a choice between a landlord’s return on property and a tenant’s ability to keep a home. Free-market rent is the owners’ proposed benchmark; household income sets a different limit for tenants. A technically workable bill still has to decide how quickly rents may rise and who absorbs the difference. His argument makes housing policy a question of distributing burdens across groups with unequal room to adjust.
When exile becomes a diplomatic dispute
Mussolini’s consolidation of dictatorship made opposition to his regime a conflict extending beyond Italy. The Roman press treats the presence of anti-fascist organizations in France as a French governmental responsibility. Calling hospitality “complicity” presses France to restrict those opponents; demanding equal protection for dictator and king also seeks recognition of the regime’s leader as entitled to the protection extended to established rulers.
Why a foreign minister could give up his seat
Beneš had led Czechoslovak foreign affairs since the state’s foundation and joined the Czechoslovak National Socialist Party in 1923. His parliamentary seat tied this diplomatic role to a particular party. The letter exposes the resulting tension: he claims authority across party lines while his party faces criticism over participation in government. Relinquishing the seat was his stated way to ease that conflict without abandoning the foreign ministry.
Original
Für und wider — Von Prof. Dr. Heinrich Rauchberg
Für und wider.
Von Prof. Dr. Heinrich Rauchberg.
Handelte es sich lediglich um technische und finanzielle Fragen, die im sozialpolitisch luftleeren Raum behandelt werden können, so lägen die Dinge einfach. Die Vorlage müßte zwar in Einzelheiten verbessert werden; aber sie begegnete keinem ernstlichen Widerstande. Die Schwierigkeiten sind sozialpolitischer Art. Sie liegen in der Art, wie die Mittellinie gezogen wird zwischen den gegensätzlichen Forderungen der Hausbesitzer und der Mieter. Die Hausbesitzer wollen sofort den vollen Ertrag ihres Hauses haben, den sie bei freier Konkurrenz erzielen könnten, und die Mieter wollen — und viele von ihnen können — keine höheren Mieten bezahlen.
Römische Pressefehde gegen Frankreich
Römische Pressefehde gegen Frankreich
„Toleranz ist Mitschuld.“ — Gleicher Schutz dem Diktator wie dem König
Rom, 13. September. Die Blätter fahren fort, Angriffe gegen Frankreich zu richten, das sie allzugroßer Toleranz gegenüber den antifascistischen Organisationen beschuldigen. Bemerkenswert ist ein Artikel der offiziösen „Tribuna“, die sich weniger scharf ausdrückt als die ultrafascistischen Organe. Das Blatt schreibt:
„Die den Antifascisten gewährte Gastfreundschaft nimmt immer mehr den Charakter der Mitschuld an. Man muß uns wissen lassen, wo man hinaus will. Gerade die Leute, die heute für die Politik Frankreichs verantwortlich sind, müßten die ersten sein, die das verstehen.“
Beneš antwortet seinen Gegnern — Niederlegung des Mandates
Beneš antwortet seinen Gegnern.
Eine Zuschrift an die Legionärgemeinde.
Die Gründe für die
Niederlegung des Mandates
waren doppelter Natur. Ich begriff die schwere Situation der Partei, die in Konflikt mit der Parlamentsmehrheit kam, und Vorwürfe hörte, daß ihr Abgeordneter in der Regierung sitze. Das war nicht richtig. Als Außenminister wurde ich von allen Parteien als ein gewissermaßen über den Parteien stehender Minister betrachtet. Drei führende Parteien, die tschechischen Sozialdemokraten, die Agrarier und die Sozialisten einigten sich dahin, daß ich in die Partei der Sozialisten eintrete. Da ich der Partei ihre Situation nicht erschweren wollte, habe ich das Mandat niedergelegt. Der zweite Grund waren die unwürdigen Intrigen innerhalb der Partei.